Re: !-Channels and the +a Flag

[Michael Neumayer <Michael.Neumayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 08:42:08PM +0100, Francis MUSEUX wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 03:54:10PM +0100, Piotr Kucharski wrote:
> > It is expected behaviour.
> 
> sure ?

Yes. I think I touched the relevant part of the code end of 1998.

channel.c:

                        if (*ip == MODE_ANONYMOUS &&
                            whatt == MODE_DEL && *chptr->chname == '!')
                                sendto_one(sptr,
                                   err_str(ERR_UNIQOPRIVSNEEDED,
                                           sptr->name), chptr->chname);

> the answer from the server to the -a has no sense (because I am the orginal
> chanop who can +r)

I can't remember why we didn't want to use a more appropriate errormessage,
maybe we just didn't want to create an extra numeric.

> Why is !chan behaviour different from &chan one ???

Because the -a problem wasn't really thought about at the time it was
implemented for &-channels I guess.

> Which one is broken ?

It's intended behaviour. We decided not to change "broken" &-behaviour.

CU

	Eumel
-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|    Michael 'Eumel' Neumayer     <Michael.Neumayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>    |
|    Eumel@IRC             ! LinuX inside !             pgp-key available    |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+